Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 9:47 AM
Sat Nov 14
65 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter
Contributors:
Jenna Sauers
Email
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Lizzie Skurnick
Email
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
09/26/09
Really!? What about the Pitt students who were literally just watching the protest from that hallway above Forbes Ave, who were then trapped in there by police and teargassed? What about them searching Seeds of Peace (an organization that provides free meals for protesters) without a warrant? What about them being unnecessarily forceful, for example, with the bike girl? And just now, I'm hearing that they're using unmuzzled dogs on protesters.
Your claims of anarchists "invading" your city are kind of hilarious since most of those craaaazy anarchists live here too. The people doing the invading were the cops and the military roving around the city in huge packs, and circling my neighborhood in helicopters, days in advance, to create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. That pretty much all of downtown was blocked off was far more disruptive than any protesting, in my experience. I got stranded today because there was literally no feasible way for me to get from downtown to my home in Polish Hill, which is like three seconds away.
AND I'd really like to see this literature you speak of that discusses shit and piss bombing plans.
09/25/09
Basically what we're doing is telling people about how "slash and burn" capitalism has hurt us as a nation and globally. We focus on education and solidarity and we don't commit acts of vandalism or violence. As far as we're concerned, a group of incredibly powerful people is making major decisions behind closed doors, and we want them to know what we think they should do. It's terribly upsetting that every person there is being painted as a "trustifarian", when most of us are students, non-profit employees or union organizers, or some sort of insane fringe, when most of us are just trying to create a huge presence of solidarity in favor of curtailing (not destroying) capitalism and the people it oppresses and the environment it destroys.
I'm actually very hurt that people are making these random stereotypical accusations. Protest has brought us the end of child labor, suffrage, civil rights and many other things all over the world. Why would you assume it has outlived it's usage because of a few rotten eggs?
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
Yes, I do not understand how or why these people think that vandalizing buildings, or charging the police using a dumpster as a battering ram does anything at all to further their causes. Jackasses.
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
which is thought to be the initial starter of the anti-globalisation movement.
You know why the G20 (and the G8) summits are the target of these protests? They set the agenda on very, very important topics, that affect billions of people, yet only 20 countries get a say. It's almost like a private club meeting and beware the people who want to get their say too (for instance farmers of developement countries who lose their livelihoods because of the way some countries subsidice their agricultural products). So Jackasses doesn't seem to be the appropriate term.
09/25/09
09/25/09
Of course there are VERY serious issues to be addressed globally. But i promise you that none of the leaders at the summit will be moved to share the perspective of the protesters because of damage done to pittsburgh residences and property.
There are far more effective means of communication and dialogue that violence and mayhem.
So yes, I stand by my use of the term jackass in reference to protesters moved to violence.
09/25/09
Sorry, I'm not trying to start anything with my responses to your posts, but a) name one for the average citizen up against a G20 crowd; and
b) this is not a means of communication in the way that you suggest. I'm not even necessarily defending it anymore, because as I said in another post, I think it's become a parody of itself, but the aim is not dialogue.
09/25/09
09/25/09
I also have a problem with people rushing to point the finger at the protesters when violence is breaking out, since there are always two groups involved. I have seen enough videos, where the police is the first to strike, be it because it is a convenient way to silence protesters and label them violent and dangerous, or because they haven't received proper crowd control training.
Any situation in which a lot of people who are very emotional are involved on both sides of the line, can devolve into a dangerous situation, as many football matches (at least in Europe) show.
09/25/09
I would love, love, love it if there could just be one national news story about who has a bone to pick with the G20 and why instead of endless stories about violence in protests.
So yeah, i wasn't very balanced, because I am pissed at the idiots. I have no beef with the people making legitimate points in a respectful way, and I probably agree with a good many of them.
I don't know if the moral of this story is that crazy people get the most attention and thus have the best approach, or that they spoil the party for everyone.
09/25/09
there are fun elements, meeting new and like-minded people, feeling as though you're a part of a group in a world where those who have similar political inclinations are not only marginalized but demonized, etc. but being an activist is actually REALLY FUCKING HARD and its really a lot more important than people give it credit. this may break a lot of hearts around here, but blogging is not actually a revolutionary activity!
don't these protestors know that the really selfless people are those who sit on their computers and shit talk other peoples attempts at direct action? maybe if these protesters did that instead, they'd earn the right to be smug.
09/25/09
Anyway, the reason I'm careful condemning the protesters (allthough the ones who do it for the thrill are to be condemned) is that at least in Genua in 2001 the state (Italy) used excessive violence and propaganda (egging protesters on, shooting people, etc) to achieve exactly that: Raising so much noise, that no "normal" person could ever identify with the concerns raised. It's condemnation by association,and it's a tactic employed by the powerfull against the powerless.
09/25/09
I do believe and accept though that extreme actions like breaking windows in restuarants (although, Starbucks? High-end is better) represent and express something real and important: however, I don't believe they work any longer because they are all part of the media spectacle and are ultimately meaningless. So that's about the size of it. I
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
So we protest to keep up the energy to come up with something better.
09/25/09
"oh my god, i wont be able to get my latte tomorrow morning before work? those damn punks and their fashionable protests! im a true individual above it all because i unquestionably support the status quo and personally resent any interruptions"
09/25/09
People should get out of from behind their computers, but they should also be working in ways -going to school, informing themselves on the ins and outs of every issue, not just the 4 key talking points, and pursuing jobs where their voices might have a shot in hell of being heard. Why not try to get some respect so people actually care what you have to say and where your feelings are coming from? I don't think anyone who has any power to enact change is going to give a shit what the person chained to the fence of their office building or conference center thinks.
09/25/09
But I promise you that by doing that you will never change the system. If your goals are reform, then yeah you should pursue a job that will give you the financial and political clout to get your legislation passed. But I'm pretty sure that the protesters at Pittsburgh this weekend aren't really asking for reform. But the attitude your OP expressed stank of bullshit bourgeois superiority. These activists have rejected the passive "change the system from the inside" lifestyle and your decision to give tax-refundable donations to Greenpeace does not make you morally superior or make your easy dismissal of their efforts any more viable.
Lets cut through the bullshit and say what it really is: its revolution versus reform. anti-globalization protesters are tied to classical leftist politics with systemic complaints while ngo employees are good-hearted reformers who focus on the micro, not the macro. it doesn't make what you do BETTER, just easier.
09/26/09
Everything you suggest violates these realities. Fringe group, rejects moderates, seeks a complete turnover of world order, unique and nuanced version of history used to support it's own aims, unwilling to compromise, accepts violence as part of the struggle... This is not unfamiliar territory. We get you, seriously we all do. As long as your movement has these qualities, it will not succeed or convince, and it seems dangerously close to moving into it's own brutal regime.
09/26/09
72 years passed between the seneca falls convention and the passing of the 19th amandment. 72 fucking years of being told to go home and shut up, that no one wanted what they were selling, that they were a nuisance and were doing more harm than good. what if they had actually listened?
and its one thing if you disagree with the politics and believe what they are fighting for it wrong. but its entirely another to be smug and superior and attempt to personally discredit them by questioning their motives. are there people who aren't there for the long haul? yes. are there people there who are self-righteous? yes. but there are plenty of self-righteous people who aren't doing a damn thing either and there are a lot of people who are there because THEY REALLY BELIEVE and that is what we have to carry us until the aforementioned preconditions are met so actual change can be affected.
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
Protests in the name of vagueness do very little for me.
09/25/09
Conversely, there was a very peaceful Free Tibet protest here weds or thursday that's gotten lots of good PR locally because everyone's talking about how peaceful, respectful and polite they were.
The police wouldn't have to be congregating in riot gear if these crowds didn't so often devolve into mayhem and anarchy. The fact that several anarchist groups have been publishing their intent to destroy businesses and disrupt the summit in anyway possible really didn;t help their cause.
09/25/09
09/25/09
The police are basically being set up to fail here. If they stand by and are prepared to respond, it'll be police intimidation and excessive force. If they hung out elsewhere waiting to be called after something goes down, people will be talking about how pittsburgh was clearly unprepared to handle something and how the police are never around when you need them.
09/25/09
Those damn anarchists and their anarchy! Don't they realize the most effective way to achieve political change is to ask for it politely? To sit with their thumb up their ass and say please? Now I'm not saying that anarchists have it all figured out because obviously they don't, but did your peaceful Free Tibet protest free Tibet?
09/25/09
Did the pro-anarchy protest do anything at all, other than cement the idea in more passive people that protesters are disruptive?
I get the frustration and lack of good choices, but when it seems like being polite and being violent are equally ineffective, I'll generally opt for the approach that is unlikely to result in bystanders being hurt.
09/25/09
YES! IT CERTAINLY DID!
Protest keeps the passion of the left alive. There are 15 year old kids who are reading about the protests in PA and thinking "wow, i believe in that message. i believe in economic and social justice" just like I did when i watched the 1999 wto protests in seattle. and those kids are going to grow up and get educations and become activists themselves. and maybe a few of them will be really fucking brilliant political theorists or organizers. maybe they'll lead movements that have an actual tangible result.
protesters at the g20 KNOW that they are not going to cause the end of global capitalism this weekend. but they are keeping that hope and that fight alive.
09/25/09
Still, how much of the message of the protest is getting out rather than the method? I'd agree with you in the media was reporting on their arguments rather than just their conduct. It probably will speak in some way to people self-motivated enough to wonder what's driving the protest.
09/25/09
a) not everyone at the protest advocates destruction of private property for exactly the reason you're saying: questions of effectiveness. but if one person does it, everyone gets blame as though they are a monolithic group without individual identity. i tend to play the devils advocate when it comes to this discussion because everyone gets so overwrought about it, but i personally fall on the side of its uselessness as a a tactic. but at the same time, if you've ever been in a protest where there is a confrontation with riot cops, it can feel a little like a warzone and people freak out. they attack as a form of defense. on both sides.
and
b) not everyone there is an anarchist. in the media reports overemphasize the actions and ignore the message, anarchists are the most left of the left and therefore the easiest to scapegoat. i'm obviously not there, but i can promise you you've got liberals, socialists, communists of varying degrees of anti-government sentiment and respect for private property.
09/25/09
And I'm sure that lots of bad behavior on both sides it going to be caused by tension of fear of what the other side might do. It's definitely not a good guys vs bad guys situation.
09/25/09
there is a belief that capitalism, by its very nature, is violent (ie, the exploitation of workers, the destruction of the environment, wage-slavery, human trafficking, etc. etc.) and that the violence is enforced by the state against its people (through police, war, dealth penalty, forced participation in the capitalist system). the economic and social injustices of a capitalist society by its nature creates class war because the rich and the poor are antagonistic and oppositional groups. and these acts of violence against private property are the reaction to the war that they feel has already been declared.
example: wars for resources or land lead to deaths in the working class because those are the people sent to fight for the rich. also, poverty leads to death in many ways. through malnutrition and starvation, through improper working conditions, through a necessary turn to illegal activities to support existence, and when someone dies as a direct or indirect result of these economic hierarchies it can be viewed as violent action against proletariat by the bourgeois. so when these groups break a window or set a dumpster on fire, in their view, they are responding to violence with violence although their violence does not actually result in the death of millions.
as they saying goes: no war but class war.
so there is my attempt to explain why some use it as a tactic. you may not agree with it, but there it is, in a very brief and non-intellectual manner.
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
It really just turned into a free for all where a handful of people screwed up every possible benefit the protest may have had at first. The cop-to-protester ratio must have been 5:1. When all the cops showed up to stop a bunch of people from eating hummus sandwiches in a park, the locals called excessive force. Everyone was so freaked out about the protest and then they saw it, and realized the police were the ones overreacting. Then a few people went and started breaking windows and suddenly the police force was justified. It's really unfortunate.
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
I'm all for *peaceful* protest, but I fail to see how vandalizing a Boston Market has anything to do with protesting the G-20.
09/25/09
09/24/09
[nhl.fanhouse.com]
09/24/09
They got baton-happy and a man died.